Monthly Archives: November 2010

I guess unless you find yourself Earthbound on the wrong side of the rapture, things could always be worse but doesn’t the fact that this is the happiest face he could put on the Democrats’ election results speak volumes in itself?

Dude. You just got a historic ass-kicking. You lost 63 seats. Republicans just scored their biggest House majority since 1949. And you still think Obama’s got the winning formula? Are you even listening to yourself when you spout drivel like this?

Like this:

Almost two years ago, we made the decision that our daughter would attend college all the way across the country at the University of Alabama. It was a fiscally prudent decision. Our daughter was and is an excellent student – just the kind of student that ‘Bama rewards with generous academic scholarships. In fact, the scholarship they offered was so generous that even taking air travel into account, she’s attending college for a tiny fraction of the cost to attend our state’s flagship school, the University of Washington and will graduate after four years debt-free and with our savings intact.

Now we’re in the uncomfortable position of wondering if we made the right decision after all, not because of any financial concerns but because it has become all too obviously apparent that it’s no longer safe for young, unescorted women to travel by air within our own borders. The imminent threat doesn’t come from terrorists, although that’s not a danger that can or should be ignored, but from TSA workers operating under new guidelines for enhanced security.

I don’t believe I’m overstating the situation. At airports where the enhanced security procedures are in place, travelers have three choices.

The Naked Scan

You spend your daughter’s lifetime telling her that granting access to her body is at her sole discretion, then Uncle Sam tells her, no, sorry, it’s your duty to bare it all in front of a low level and poorly screened government employee even though everyone knows the chance that you’re an explosive-packing terrorist is next to zero.

The Public Grope

Should your daughter exercise her right to keep her privates private, she’ll be subject to the new enhanced pat-down. The TSA has declined to publish the full guidelines for the pat-down so your daughter will have no way to gauge whether or not the officer administering the pat-down is exceeding her authority. For example, your daughter is entitled to be patted down by a female TSA agent except in the case “extraordinary circumstances” but those circumstances are undefined in the guidelines available to the public.

The Private Grope

Finally, if your daughter doesn’t want to endure the humiliation of having her breasts and genitals groped in public, she can ask for a private screening room. Of course, she’s entitled to have a traveling companion with her during the pat-down. But – wait! – she’s traveling alone! What sane parent would advise their daughter to enter a private room with a stranger with the intent of letting that stranger lay hands on her body?

Which brings me back to my original question. The TSA has implemented a system where – for their own good – young women are subjected to security procedures that would be crimes were they conducted by private individuals. When faced with three equally abhorrent options, which do we advise our daughters to take?

Isn’t that right? Rather than relying on the government, it’s a conservative principle, at least in my mind, that we should rely on friends and family in times of need. And that friends and family should consider it a privilege, rather than a burden, to help.

Today it’s time to put that into practice. My good friend, Jimmie Bise, Jr., is in a predicament of the auto repair kind. Jimmie was one of my first and is now one of my best Twitter friends. He’s an amazing blogger who always has kind words or a bit of encouragment. He is one of the most supportive people I know, virtually or in real life, and if I were in a tough situation, I know he’d be right there to help in any way he could.

Like this:

My favorite part is where he tells the TSA public relations representative, “…Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I’ll spend to find out how to get people more of it.”

Like this:

I don’t make any secret of the fact that I’m not good with numbers…words are my thing. So when even I can look at some numbers and see that something is terribly wrong, that is some serious trouble.

Take the October jobs report for the State of Washington. It tells us that 5,900 jobs were added. Sounds good, right? Or wrong, as the case may be.

A second look reveals that of the 5,900 jobs, 4,000 were in the public sector. To my number-challenged way of thinking, that burdens only 1,900 private sector employees with supporting 4,000 new government workers.

Isn’t it obvious that’s unsustainable?

Read a real analysis of the numbers from Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

Like this:

Do you think the TSA, under the direction of Janet Napolitano, cares what the American public thinks about grossly invasive and, in my opinion, unconstitutional airport screenings? Think again.

Despite viral objections to new technology and procedures, the Transportation Security Administration PLANS NO RETREAT on airport screening, officials tell [POLITICO] Playbook. But the administration is having conversations with pilots’ unions about their loud objections to the full-body scanners and alternate patdowns, and a resolution is expected this week. As Thanksgiving approaches, look for more 9-11 families and other “security validators” to make the case in the media for rigorous screening. The fire on this story was lit by Drudge, along with CNN and USA Today, and the complaints by pilots were a propellant. Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano scored a front-page headline, story and photo in USA Today on Monday with her call for patience and vigilance by the traveling public.